You think so? <gg>
Coulter is really a loose cannon for the right. That woman has no sense. Lucky for us, she's on the other side. I think as turnoffs go, for younger voters, Coulter is a major one- so in that sense, she is of great benefit for the left, and of no use to the right- since she merely embarrasses the staid conservatives (who might have some hope of winning), and energizes the more fringe elements, who look nuttier and nuttier as time goes by. :-) Plus it's very entertaining to read about her numerous faux pas.
' When a questioner asked Coulter why she praises marriage but broke off so many engagements, she responded by calling the questioner ugly."
Funny definition of ugly she has, apparently.
............
UPDATE: Coulter Suggests John Edwards Is a 'Faggot' -- Now The Backlash Begins
By E&P Staff
Published: March 02, 2007 6:05 PM ET
NEW YORK In recent years she has suggested that Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Al Gore have or may have homosexual tendencies. Now columnist/author Ann Coulter has targeted former senator (and current candidate for president) John Edwards.
Speaking today at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference CPAC) in Washington, D.C., Coulter closed her remarks with: “I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot,’ so I -- so kind of an impasse, can’t really talk about Edwards.”
Audience members appeared startled, then many clapped, and she opened the floor to questions. The event was carried on C-SPAN.
Democratic Party chief Howard Dean weighed in later: "There is no place in political discourse for this kind of hate-filled and bigoted comments. While Democrats and Republicans may disagree on the issues, we should all be able to agree that this kind of vile rhetoric is out of bounds. The American people want a serious, thoughtful debate of the issues. Republicans -- including the Republican presidential candidates who shared the podium with Ann Coulter today -- should denounce her hateful remarks."
The remarks also drew disapproval from some popular conservative commentators. Ed Morrissey on his
Captain's Quarters blog wrote: "Yeah, that's just what CPAC needs -- an association with homophobia. Nice work, Ann."
Michelle Malkin expressed disapproval, and at her Hot Air site regular contributor "Bryan" wrote: "I’m no fan of John Edwards, but that’s just a stupid joke. It’s over the line. The laughter it generated across the room was more than a little annoying. Last year it was 'raghead.' This year it’s calling John Edwards a 'faggot.' Two years in a row, Coulter has finished up an otherwise sharp CPAC routine with an obnoxious slur that liberals will fling at conservatives for years to come. Thanks, Ann."
Vice President Cheney addressed the group yesterday. Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney appeared today.
The New York Times' Adam Nagourney failed to mention the crack about Edwards, in observing tonight: "The conference drew thousands of attendees, many of whom waited in a long line out the door for a late-afternoon appearance by Ann Coulter, the conservative author and commentator."
The Washington Post covered the conference but did not mention Coulter at all in its news report. Neither did the Associated Press, which also attended. UPI did mention the "faggot" quote in its report.
The Post's Dana Milbank, in a column for the Saturday paper, observed: "Ann Coulter used an anti-gay slur to describe John Edwards (the line drew applause) and asked: 'Did Al Gore actually swallow Michael Moore?' When a questioner asked Coulter why she praises marriage but broke off so many engagements, she responded by calling the questioner ugly."
mediainfo.com |
